What is equality to you?

[SnailyBoy]

1 minute ago, danot said:

And what if the boss of a black orientated workplace had to choose between a black candidate and a white candidate?

What about it?

[danot]

1 minute ago, makapaka said:

Good grief.

 

what do you think would happen?

I'm no longer sure to be honest. 

[SnailyBoy]

Just now, WiseOwl182 said:

Down the road signposted "double standards". Discrimination is discrimination. Not giving someone a job because of their skin colour or gender is discrimination.

Where have I shown double standards?

 

 

[danot]

4 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

What about it?

Would it be fair to employ the privileged white man? Not my term by the way. I'm just quoting others.

[SnailyBoy]

Just now, danot said:

Would it be fair to employ the privileged white man? Not my term by the way. I'm just quoting others.

I've no idea.

 

I'm guessing this is some scenario in your head.

 

Just have a look at

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

 

You should find all you're looking for in there.

 

[WiseOwl182]

12 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Where have I shown double standards?

 

 

By not recognising "positive action" as a euphemism for discrimination.

[SnailyBoy]

Just now, WiseOwl182 said:

By not recognising "positive action" as a euphemism for discrimination.

You mean not accepting your claim that "positive action" is a euphemism for discrimination?

 

That's not double standards.

 

[danot]

27 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Heard it all before.

 

It's still nonsense and pretty tiring now.

 

 

 

It's the moralizing, self righteous 'white male savour' attitude towards the so-called  "disadvantaged" that's at risk of becoming tiring nonsense.   

[Guest makapaka]

15 minutes ago, danot said:

It's the moralizing, self righteous 'white male savour' attitude towards the so-called  "disadvantaged" that's at risk of becoming tiring nonsense.   

No ones moralising or bring self righteous.

 

no one can adequately explain why positive action is  discrimination.

 

other than say it prejudices a white person over a black person seemingly - bizarre.

[danot]

12 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

I've no idea.

 

I'm guessing this is some scenario in your head.

 

Just have a look at

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

 

You should find all you're looking for in there.

 

Every scenario so far has been in our heads.  You've no idea who should be employed? Okay, I'll ask you this. Should not having any white employees give either candidate an advantage over the other or influence the boss's decision in any way?

10 minutes ago, makapaka said:

No ones moralising or bring self righteous.

 

no one can adequately explain why positive action is discrimination. 

 

other than say it prejudices a white person over a black person seemingly - bizarre.

Yet you're able to explain why discrimination is discriminatory.